Abstract
Despite commitments to joint action, EU members often differ on crucial policies. In global economic governance, for instance, European G20 members diverge on public debt and trade imbalances with Germany opposing France and Italy. Why did the German government assume a solitary position instead of pursuing a European compromise following previous commitments? The article examines the societal foundations of German, French and Italian divergences with the societal approach to governmental preference formation. It constitutes a complement to integration theories in explaining persistent European divergences. In applying the societal approach, I argue that domestic ideas prevail in shaping governmental preferences when fundamental economic policy issues such as public debt are at stake, while material interests prevail, when a governance issue (like trade regulation) implies costs and benefits for economic sectors. Germany’s solitary role as well as the French and Italian stances in the G20 debates reflect the demands of domestic interest groups and of voter’s ideational expectations.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Literature
Atkins, R., & Peel, Q. (2011, February 19). G20 strikes compromise on global imbalances. Financial Times.
BBC. (2014, March 12). Matteo Renzi proposes big tax cuts and electoral reform. BBC News. Retrieved from http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26549249?print=true
Driftmann, H. H. (2010, October 13). Das Spiel mit Wechselkursen birgt Gefahren. Interview in Manager Magazine. http://www.dihk.de/presse/meldungen/meldung012889
Emié, B. HE. (2011, June 23). G20 Lunch, Institute of Chartered Accountants. Retrieved from https://uk.ambafrance.org/IMG/pdf/Amba_S_2_23062011.pdf
Eurobarometer. (2010). Public opinion in the European Union, Standard Eurobarometer 74. Retrieved from http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/eb/eb74/eb74_anx_full_fr.pdf
Eurobarometer. (2011). Public opinion in the European Union, Standard Eurobarometer 75. Retrieved from http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/eb/eb75/eb75_anx_full_fr.pdf
Eurobarometer. (2012). Public opinion in the European Union, Standard Eurobarometer 78. Retrieved from https://ec.europa.eu/commfrontoffice/publicopinion/archives/eb/eb78/eb78_publ_en.pdf
Eurobarometer. (2013). Public opinion in the European Union, Standard Eurobarometer 80. Retrieved from https://ec.europa.eu/commfrontoffice/publicopinion/archives/eb/eb80/eb80_anx_en.pdf
Faujas, A. (2013, September 6). Les dossiers economiques ressoudent le G20. Le Monde.
Fioretos, O. (2001). The domestic sources of multilateral preferences: Varieties of capitalism in the European Community. In P. A. Hall & D. Soskice (Eds.), Varieties of capitalism (pp. 213–244). Oxford University Press.
Fotina, C. (2015). Confindustria report bills Germany’s surplus as ‘unsustainable’. Retrieved from http://www.italy24.ilsole24ore.com/art/government-policies/2015-01-16/industrial-compact-161947.php?uuid=ABmf04eC
Gauthier-Villars, D. (2009, February 8). Sarkozy defends French stimulus plan. Wall Street Journal.
Goldstein, J., & Keohane, R. O. (1993). Ideas and foreign policy: An analytical framework. In R. O. Keohane & J. Goldstein (Eds.), Ideas and foreign policy: Beliefs, institutions and political change (pp. 3–30). Cornell University Press.
Hall, P. A. (1997). The role of interests, institutions, and ideas in the comparative political economy of the industrialized nations. In M. Lichbach & A. Zuckerman (Eds.), Comparative politics (pp. 174–207). Cambridge University Press.
Hall, P. A. (2012). The economics and politics of the Euro crisis. German Politics, 21, 355–371.
Hodson, D. (2011, March). The paradox of EMU’s external representation: The case of the G20 and the IMF. Paper presented at the EUSA 12th Biennial International Conference.
Hollande, F. (2013, August 27). 21st Ambassadors’ Conference. Retrieved from http://www.diplomatie.gouv.fr/en/the-ministry-of-foreign-affairs/events/article/21st-ambassadors-conference-speech
Hollande, F. (2014, January 7). President Hollande holds talks with US Treasury Secretary. Communique issued by the Presidency of the Republic. http://www.ambafrance-uk.org/President-Hollande-has-meeting
Ioannou, D., Leblond, P., & Niemann, A. (2015). European integration and the crisis: Practice and theory. Journal of European Public Policy, 22, 155–176.
Jensen, C. S. (2013). Neo-functionalism. In M. Cini & N. Perez-Solorzano Borragan (Eds.), European Union Politics (pp. 59–70). Oxford University Press.
Kirton, J. J. (2013). G20 governance for a globalized world. Ashgate.
Krotz, U., & Schild, J. (2013). Shaping Europe: France, Germany, and embedded bilateralism from the Elysee treaty to twenty-first century politics. Oxford University Press.
Loth, W. (1994). Europa als nationales Interesse? Tendenzen deutscher Europapolitik von Schmidt bis Kohl. Integration, 17, 149–156.
Luckhurst, J. (2012). The G20 and ad hoc Embedded Liberalism: Economic Governance amid Crisis and Dissensus. Politics & Policy, 40, 740–782.
Milner, H. V. (1997). Interests, institutions, and information: Domestic politics and international relations. Princeton University Press.
Merkel, A. (2010). Regierungserklärung von Bundeskanzlerin Merkel zum EU-Gipfel in Brüssel und zum Gipfel der G20-Staaten in Seoul. Retrieved from http://bundeskanzlerin.de/Content/DE/Regierungserklaerung/2010/2010-10-27-merkel-regerklaerung-eu-G-20.html
Merkel, A. (2011). Rede von Bundeskanzlerin Angela Merkel anlässlich des BDI-Tags der deutschen Industrie. Retrieved from http://www.bundeskanzlerin.de/nn_683608/Content/DE/Rede/2011/09/2011-09-27-bkin-bdi.html
Monti, M. (2012, June 16). G20 Summit in Los Cabos. In A. Moravcsik (1993). Preferences and power in the European Community: A liberal intergovernmentalist approach. Journal of Common Market Studies, 31, 473–524.
Moravcsik, A. (1997). Taking preferences seriously: A liberal theory of international politics. International Organization, 51, 513–553.
Moravcsik, A. (1999). The choice for Europe—Current commentary and future research. Journal of European Public Policy, 6, 168–179.
Moschella, M., & Quaglia, L. (2016). To agree or not to agree? Explaining the cohesiveness of the European Union in the Group of Twenty. Journal of European Public Policy, 23, 906–924.
Niemann, A., & Ioannou, D. (2015). European economic integration in times of crisis: A case of neofunctionalism? Journal of European Public Policy, 22, 196–218.
OECD. (2016). G20—The OECD and G20. Retrieved from https://www.oecd.org/g20/summits/pittsburgh/
Palmer, R. (2012, June 11). Canada to tell G20 austerity and growth possible. Reuters.
Pollack, M. A. (2005). Theorizing the European Union: International organization, domestic polity, or experiment in new governance? Annual Review of Political Science, 8, 357–398.
Renzi, M. (2016). Retrieved from https://www.dw.com/en/italian-pm-renzi-lashes-out-at-german-trade-surplus/a-36114853
Sarkozy, N. (2011). Retrieved from http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/01/27/us-davos-sarkozy-imf-idUSTRE70Q3AF20110127
Schäuble, W. (2010, November 8). The US has lived on borrowed money for too long. Interview in Der Spiegel.
Schäuble, W. (2014). Retrieved from https://de.reuters.com/article/g20-australia/g20-says-nearing-growth-goal-but-more-needed-from-europe-idINKBN0HG04X20140921
Schäuble, W. (2017). Retrieved from https://www.dw.com/en/schäuble-defends-exports-as-us-german-trade-gap-widens/a-37843038
Schild, J. (2013). Leadership in hard times: Germany, France, and the management of the Eurozone crisis. German Politics and Society, 31, 24–47.
Schirm, S. A. (2009). Ideas and interests in global financial governance: Comparing German and US preference formation. Cambridge Review of International Affairs, 22, 501–521.
Schirm, S. A. (2016). Domestic ideas, institutions, or interests? Explaining governmental preferences towards global economic governance. International Political Science Review, 37, 66–80.
Schirm, S. A. (2018a). The domestic politics of European preferences towards global economic governance. New Global Studies, 12, 303–324.
Schirm, S. A. (2018b). Societal foundations of governmental preference formation in the Eurozone crisis. European Politics and Society, 19, 63–78.
Schirm, S. A. (2020). Refining domestic politics theories of IPE: A societal approach to governmental preferences. Politics, 40, 396–412.
Sharma, S. D. (2014). The global economic imbalances: The dangers of not rebalancing. New Global Studies, 8, 153–176.
Smyth, J. (2014). US urges EU to do more to stimulate its economy. Financial Times. Retrieved from http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/4137a208-4160-11e4-b98f-00144feabdc0.html#axzz3Qtq1jnk8)
Steinbrück, P. (2009, June 12). G8: Ende der expansiven Geldpolitik? Handelsblatt. Retrieved from www.handelsblatt.com/politik/nachrichten/g8-ende-der-expansiven-geldpolitik;2353324
The Economist. (2009, March 12). The G20. Talking shop on Thames.
Tremonti, G. (2011, April 16). International monetary and financial committee of the IMF. Retrieved from https://www.imf.org/external/spring/2011/imfc/statement/eng/ita.pdf
Wagstyl, S., & Politi, J. (2014, October 16). Merkel defends fiscal rules as Paris and Rome put growth first. Financial Times.
Wintour, P. (2012, June 19). G20 to endorse growth plan and urge more financial integration in Europe. The Guardian.
Wintour, P., & Elliot, L. (2011, November 4). G20 leaders press Italy to accept IMF checks on cuts programme. The Guardian.
World Trade Organization. (2015). Total Merchandise trade. stat.wto.org/
Wouters, J., Sterkx, S., & Corthaut, T. (2010). The international financial crisis, global financial governance, and the European Union. Leuven Centre for Global Governance Studies.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Schirm, S.A. (2022). European Divergences: Germany, France, and Italy in Global Economic Governance. In: Oswald, M., Robertson, J. (eds) The Legacy and Impact of German Unification. New Perspectives in German Political Studies. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-97154-0_13
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-97154-0_13
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-97153-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-97154-0
eBook Packages: Political Science and International StudiesPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)